FutureAir

Tag: Air Pollution

This is: Coronavirus

April 2020

The Coronavirus pandemic has taken our world by storm, and it is our responsibility to continue to examine the forces at work that lead to unforeseen harm.

As our “normal” life has come to a halt the invisibility cloak has been lifted. We now see the individuals most at risk, we now see the areas with the most fraught medical infrastructure and their population demographics, we now see those workers deemed essential, we see the people that uphold our daily lives. We also see that visibility does not beget equality, and the distance between visibility and equality is work.

A study from the Center for Disease Control released on April 8, 2020, details how 33% of COVID-19 hospitalized patients are African American descent and the black demographic accounts for 13% of the U.S. population. In comparison, the white demographic, which accounts for 76% of the U.S. population, made up 45% of COVID-19 hospitalizations [NPR]. Evidently, the African American community is disproportionately affected by coronavirus.

Essential workers are required to continue working at no additional compensation for the added risk of contracting coronavirus. Many of these workers are paid minimum wage. The Trump administration recently suggested cutting wages of foreign guest workers on U.S. farms in order to assist the agriculture industry – an industry that received a $9.5 billion disaster aid relief package [Common Dreams]. Vulnerable workers are deemed essential and undercut in one fell swoop.

The New York Times detailed findings from a Harvard study in which higher rates of outdoor air pollution are associated with higher rates of hospitalization from COVID-19. Communities with high rates of PM 2.5 are at greater risk of illness. Those areas with the highest rates of pollution are also home to some of the most vulnerable communities. In New York City, areas of Queens, with numerous polluting power plants, have been hit hardest by the coronavirus, which is home to dense immigrant communities.

How have we played a role in creating these realities?

The evidence goes on. There are countless examples of injustice and inequality throughout our ‘normal’ daily lives, but on any other day, we choose ignorance. Coronavirus has exposed our fraught democratic system and shined a light on the overlooked and marginalized communities within that system. The evidence is more potent and direr than ever, and we must choose to see the forces of inequality, acknowledge the disenfranchised, and we must unlearn ingrained and inherited systems of inequality.

In these trying times, we may not have all the solutions…or any solutions at all. But at this moment, FutureAir is looking for the bright side – read about it here.

Aubrey, Allison, and Joe Neel. “CDC Hospital Data Point To Racial Disparity In COVID-19 Cases.” NPR, NPR, 8 Apr. 2020, www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/04/08/830030932/cdc-hospital-data-point-to-racial-disparity-in-covid-19-cases.

Friedman, Lisa. “New Research Links Air Pollution to Higher Coronavirus Death Rates.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 7 Apr. 2020, www.nytimes.com/2020/04/07/climate/air-pollution-coronavirus-covid.html?referringSource=articleShare.

Johnson, Jake. “’Bullying of Marginalized Workers’: Trump Moves to Slash Pay of Guest Farmworkers Amid Covid-19 Crisis.” Common Dreams, 11 Apr. 2020, www.commondreams.org/news/2020/04/11/bullying-marginalized-workers-trump-moves-slash-pay-guest-farmworkers-amid-covid-19.

Schuessler, Jennifer. “The Overlooked History of Women at Work.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 16 Jan. 2020, www.nytimes.com/2020/01/16/arts/design/womens-work-grolier-club.html.

Written by Mollie Wodenshek for FutureAir

Dumb and Dumb Air

May 2019

A recent article from The New York Times suggests that the conversation about indoor air quality has entered the collective consciousness. That is to say, beyond physical health risks, indoor air quality effects on our mental capabilities as well.

For the last fifty years, builders and contractors have focused on eliminating the threats of outdoor air pollution while inside. Building codes require sealing that reduce the amount of air flow in exchange for better greater efficiency for heating and cooling systems. However, these sealing processes have created dangerous indoor climates. When we sit in sealed room toxins from chemical product treatments and our own human breath build up and create harmful environments.

Studies have demonstrated the detrimental effects that indoor air toxins pose to brain function. In 2009, William Fisk, a mechanical engineer at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, experimented with indoor air pollution and found that people performed far worse when exposed to levels of carbon dioxide at 2,500ppm than those exposed to 1,000ppm of carbon dioxide. The New York Times stated that these levels are not usual in crowded spaces.

Since Dr. Fisk’s study, other scientists have taken up the issue of indoor air pollution. A Harvard study tracked its participants over a six-day period. They found that over the time span, as the levels of carbon dioxide grew from 500 ppm to 1,400 ppm, participants test score plummeted. The scientists were stunned by the results, not because of the decline in mental functions, but because the carbon dioxide levels they experimented with were not unusual. The levels of carbon dioxide they tested could be found in most indoor settings.

Although these studies demonstrate a negative relationship between indoor air quality and cognitive performance, the evidence is still far and few between. As The Times pointe out, other experiments have not met the same conclusion. The truth is that if you’re not looking for the effects of indoor air pollution, then you will not find them. Indoor air pollution is a silent killer.

Ultimately, we spend most of our times indoors and most of the time, our most important decisions are made indoors, often in small rooms with no ventilation. The New York Times’ article, “Is Conference Room Air Making You Dumber?” begs the question.

Other evidence suggests, “increasing the ventilation rate in schools can raise children’s scores on tests and speed at tasks, and reduce absences.” If we are already designing spaces for maximum performance and productivity, then these studies suggest going the extra mile to account for the factors that we cannot see.

The article concluded, “without a specialized sensor, you can’t really know how much carbon dioxide is building up while you hunker down in a small room for a long meeting.” If we only change the things that we can see and measure (think heating and cooling efficiency) than it is imminent that we invest in tools to make the invisible visible. Accounting for air quality in the spaces we spend the most time in will improve our health, cognitive functions, and our peace of mind.

“Is Conference Room Air Making You Dumber?” The New York Times

Written for FutureAir by Mollie Wodenshek

Image Credit: Hanna Barczyk

Measure Air, Change Air

March 2019

During the Industrial Revolution, humanity adopted the mantra, “Ignorance is bliss.” Collateral damage went unobserved. Side effects were not on the radar. We built this world inconsequentially.

In the modern age, societally, we have turned towards awareness. Droves of people have come to the forefront of development in order to remedy years of ignorance that have led to a sickening of humanity and our one and only Planet. Perhaps, we were truly ignorant in the past, or perhaps, we can forgo our ignorant perspective because now we have the means to change. But, how do we enact this change?

Public Health Policy & Law

Research from Jamie Chriqui, Jean O’Connor, and Frank Chaloupka, produced in 2011, evaluated the necessity of policy for public health awareness. Their article, “What Gets Measured Gets Changed: Evaluating Law and Policy for Maximum Impact,” uses examples of tobacco, obesity, and vaccination policy to demonstrate how change takes effect. In their review, they noted the importance of public health policy and law surveillance. In order to enforce behavioral change the “policy inputs” must be measured. In-depth analysis of policy provides information about what does and does not work.

A critical focus of the article concerned the “feedback loop” in making law and policy. In a sense, policy making is a bit of trial and error. Public health policy and law are the tools for change. The results of the implemented policy affect the on-going modification of that very policy. It is important to remember that policies evolve over time.

Ultimately, it is not enough to simply observe a problem, enforce a policy like a bandage, and call it a day. Implementing change is only half the battle. “We must ‘measure’ or evaluate the nuances of a given policy by evaluating its breadth and depth in a systematic and reliable fashion,” write the authors. Continuous surveillance allows policymakers to recognize where policy is successful and where it needs improvement.

Smart Air Manager

In the modern age of awareness, we need to evaluate the spaces where we spend our time as components of health. What’s more, we need to observe the invisible forces at work that affect our lives. We spend 90% of our time indoors, and yet there is little research on how indoor climates affect our health. FutureAir is designing a product to observe our indoor air. This monitoring system will allow us to work smarter to protect our health.

SAM™ is FutureAir’s Smart Air Manager that measures and reports air quality information in real time. SAM™ reports the levels of carbon dioxide (CO₂), particulate matter (PM), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), carbon monoxide (CO), methane (CH₄), temperature, and humidity. We already know that these chemicals can create toxic environments. SAM™ tells us when these components reach harmful levels, and it initiates action to improve air quality.

The dashboard above is an overview of a complete week of data generated by SAM™. The bottom axis represents the day of the week, and the line graphs the particles per million of each element in the air (or, in the case of temperature and humidity, the graph shows the degrees and percentage respectively). The graph is also color coordinated for easy reading of the air. When the line is red, the air quality is dangerous–blue indicates air within the normal parameters, as defined by international agencies such as the EPA. The gray shadow map represents the previous day’s measurements for easy comparison.

On this particular graph, the VOC’s and CO levels were hazardously high during the latter half of the week.

SAM is a real-time air quality manager that brings awareness to the invisible problem of indoor air pollution and our health. One day, SAM’s measurements could affect policy and law change.

FutureAir is a means to policy and lawmaking. FutureAir is an investment in public health. Only through opening the door of the great unknown can we change it. “What gets measured gets changed” is the adage for the modern age.

Written by Mollie Wodenshek for FutureAir

References
Chriqui, James, O’Connor, Jean, and Chaloupka, Frank, “What Gets Measured Gets Changed: Evaluating Law and Policy for Maximum Impact,” Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 2011.

Clean Air and Productivity

January 2019

Finally, something we can all agree on–the value of productivity. In our capitalist economy, employers and employees alike search for ways to increase worker output. Facebook and other large corporations have entire campuses for offices. These campuses provide cafeterias, gyms, and dry-cleaning facilities for employees. As a result, employees spend more time on campus and attentive and less time around town distracted.

The secret to productivity is about the workplace environment, but perhaps it is more intuitive than big business, big perks, and bright colors.

Recent research shows that indoor air quality can affect cognitive functions and our health and well being. Cognitive functions are those mental processes that lead to the acquisition of knowledge and allow us to carry out our daily tasks. And are definitely related to the air we breathe. A study by Harvard Business Review reported a five to six percent increase in worker productivity when the Air Quality Index (AQI) was reported as “good,” or between 0-50, rather than “poor,” or between 150-200 (as published by the EPA).

The researchers explained the variations in productivity as a consequence of particulate matter in the air. Particulate matter enters through our nose, mouth, and skin and enters the bloodstream. It travels to our central nervous system (CNS) and lodges in the brain stem. This causes inflammation of the CNS, cortical stress, and cerebrovascular damage. “Greater exposure to fine particles is associated with lower intelligence and diminished performance over a range of cognitive domains,” the study concludes.

The effects of air pollution on worker’s health have been previously researched but focused on workers in outdoor environments. The Harvard study demonstrated, for the first time, that knowledge-based employees also face the dangers of air pollution indoors.

Indoor spaces are containers for volatile organic compounds (VOCs). VOCs are the by-products of building materials and cleaning supplies and other pollutants often caused by humans. The unusual combination of these compounds makes them uniquely dangerous. A study conducted in 2013, demonstrated how a just-painted room had a similar effect on participants as consuming alcohol (Satish et al).

A study conducted in 2015 tested cognitive functions amongst participants in different building settings. The buildings were divided into “Conventional”, “Green,” or low VOCs, and “Green +” or “Green” with higher ventilation rates. The experiment was conducted for six days, and on two of those days, researchers increased the amount of CO₂ in the air. Each day the participants took a test that examined nine cognitive functions. The “Green” setting demonstrated a 61% increase in cognitive function, while the “Green +” setting showed a 101% increase in cognitive function.

All this knowledge comes at a cost worth paying attention to. The standard for indoor air quality comes from The American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE). However, recent research shows that these standards do not maximize employee health. The standards strike a balance between what is acceptable and what is affordable. Green buildings are more effective at increasing productivity and reducing health risks, but they cost a pretty penny.

Increased air quality often requires newer systems and greater ventilation which means more energy. A Harvard study found, “doubling the ventilation rate would cost less than $40 per person per year in all climate zones investigated, and would improve the performance of workers by 8%. This was equated with a $6,500 increase in employee productivity per year.” Although the initial cost may be great, “the increased productivity of an employee is more than 150 times higher than the energy costs associated with increased ventilation.” Though green buildings may impact carbon emissions more than necessary.

The workplace, home, and classroom should be spaces that stimulate the mind. If the workplace is a space we feel good in we will be more productive, if the classroom is invigorating it will encourage children to learn, and if the home is comfortable we will relax. For years we have designed spaces to be ergonomically sound and attractive. Now, with environmental insight constantly advancing, we can create spaces to maximize our attention, productivity, and health.

Written by Mollie Wodenshek for FutureAir

References
Change, Tom, Graff Zivin, Joshua, Gross, Tal, and Neidell, Matthew, “Air Pollution is Making Office Workers Less Productive,” Harvard Business Review, 2016.
MacNaughton, Piers, Satish, Ush, Guillermo, Jose, Lauren, Cedeno, Flanigan, Skye, Vallarino, Jose, Coull, Brent, Spengler, John, and Allen, Joseph, “The impact of working in a green certified building on cognitive function and health,” Building and Environment, Volume 114, 2017.
UL Environment, “Technical Brief,” Effects of Indoor Environmental Quality on Performance and Productivity, 2016.

Photo
Courtesy of Flickr user OliBac via Creative Commons

Air Pollution under Trump

December 2018

Back in October, President Trump tweeted a bastardized WHO (World Health Organization) map that purported the U.S. had the cleanest air in the world. Although the U.S. has cleaner air than more populated countries in Asian and African regions, it is far from unpolluted, and farther from innocent.

The original WHO map displayed the levels of PM2.5 around the world. PM stands for particulate matter, and PM2.5 denotes small, but inhalable, particles present in the air that can cause serious health issues. PM2.5 comes from coal power plant emissions, automobiles, wildfires, and other sources. The EPA set the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for PM2.5 at 12μg/m3 in 2012. The current average for the Northeast region in the United States falls beneath 12. However, in the West and the Rockies, the PM2.5 rises above the standard.

The EPA says, “Despite great progress in air quality improvement, approximately 111 million people nationwide lived in counties with pollution levels above the primary NAAQS in 2017.” According to Apte Research group, the levels of PM2.5 in the air reduce life expectancy one whole year on average. Of course, that average considers the best and worst air quality regions. The Apte Research Group reports life expectancy can be reduced by 0.4 years in the cleanest countries and 1.8 years in the most polluted.

Throughout the Obama administration, the U.S. took steps to create regulations to reduce PM2.5, however, in the wake of Andrew Wheeler’s appointment as director of the EPA, regulations are being rolled back, or in some cases, retrospectively revised. In October, the EPA discontinued its air pollution review panel, which makes regulations revisions easier to achieve.

Despite the looming government shutdown, the EPA on December 28, proposed a revision to the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS). The proposed guideline revision would reduce public health as a factor in determining dangerous air pollutants. The Washington Post reported, “the change would prevent regulators from calculating positive health effects — known as “co-benefits” — that come from reducing pollutants other than those being targeted.”

Evidence suggests that Mercury restrictions prevent an average of 11,000 premature deaths and 4,700 heart attacks annually amongst workers. However, the EPA’s actions now suggest, “it was inappropriate to factor in such co-benefits.” The irony is the EPA’s mission is to protect human health and the environment. It seems Andrew Wheeler is struggling or doesn’t care enough to follow the compounding effects of air pollution. Perhaps all the PM2.5 in the air is making his thinking hazy.

The correlations are clear, greenhouse gases are the largest emitter of PM2.5. PM2.5 pollutes the air, is hazardous to breathe, and reduces life expectancy. Now is NOT the time to turn back on progress, but to continue building awareness and understand the effects of air pollution on human health in order to live long healthy lives.

Written by Mollie Wodenshek for FutureAir

References
Apte JS, Brauer M, Cohen AJ, Ezzati M, Pope CA III, “Ambient PM2.5 reduces global and regional life expectancy,” Environmental Science and Technology Letters, 2018.
Dennis, Brady and Eliperin, Juliet, “EPA to make it harder to tighten mercury rules in the future,” The Washington Post, 2018.
Guillén, Alex, “Trump touts U.S. air quality — under Obama,” Politico, 2018.
Sengupta, Somini, “Air Pollution Is Shortening Your Life. Here’s How Much,” The New York Times. 2018.
The United States Environmental Protection Agency, “Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Trends.”

Photo
Cheshire, Ohio. Captured by Maddie MgGarvey for The New York Times.

How’s the Air in London?

May 2018

Since 2010, toxic air in London has been at illegal levels, and for a brief period last year, air pollution in London was even worse than Beijing, according to statistics from the London mayor’s office. This air has a direct effect on the lives of Londoners, with more than 9,000 dying prematurely each year, and the air itself is no doubt the result from vehicles on the road–including those that use diesel.

Despite the statistics, Londoners seem to be unaware of how severe the problem is. But artist Michael Pinsky set off to change that by setting up an exhibit on the grounds of the Somerset House which included five geodesic domes, or pollution pods, each designed to simulate the atmospheric conditions in Beijing; São Paulo; London; New Delhi; and Norway’s Tautra Island by recreating the local air using safe chemicals.

Pinsky’s hope was that by directly experiencing levels of pollution from around the world, people would be galvanized to act.

“In terms of driving behavioral change, the thing that seemed important was to pick something that affects everyday life,” he said. “I picked London because pollution is something I feel every day.”

A tour through these geodesic pollution pods from least to most polluted would leave one walking from Tautra Island, to London, to Beijing, to New Delhi, and then finally to São Paulo, where the air is so noxious it made guests desperate to get out. Those visitors from rural locations suffered the most, suggesting that it may be possible to grow numb to constant high levels of outdoor air pollution. Londoners shared their own experiences with London’s pollution, reporting discolored mucus, difficult exercising outdoors, and purchasing plants to improve indoor air quality.

In addition to hosting the exhibit, Somerset House also raised a new Union Jack flag for Earth Day that changes color in real time as it reacted to London’s air quality, transforming from red, white, and blue to gray and black as it reacts to levels of radiation exposure.

Click here to read the full article.

Coolant Chemicals in the Courts

August 2017

On August 8, ​the​ United States Court of ​Appeals​ ​ruled against restrictions to ​products​ ​that contain​ ​hydrofluorocarbons​ ​(HFCs)​​.​ ​HFCs​ ​are​ ​a​ ​harmful​ ​greenhouse​ ​gas​ ​that​ ​trap​ ​heat​ ​in​ ​the atmosphere.​ According​ ​to​ Inside​ ​Climate​ ​News, ​​the​ ​ruling​ ​was​ ​in​ ​favor​ ​of​ ​two​ ​foreign HFC​ ​manufacturers (Mexichem Fluor and Arkema),​ ​holding​ ​that​ ​the​ ​“EPA​ ​had​ ​no​ ​authority​ ​to​ ​regulate​ ​the​ ​gases​ ​under the​ ​Clean​ ​Air​ ​Act.” This was bad news for Honeywell International and Chemours, companies that have been manufacturing less harmful coolant chemicals called hydrofluoroolefins.

The​ ​court​ ​ruling​ ​“​shows​ ​that​ ​at​ ​least​ ​some​ ​judges​ ​think​ ​the Environmental Protection​ ​Agency​ ​needs​ ​more​ ​specific​ ​authority​ ​from​ ​Congress​ ​to​ ​act​ ​on​ ​HFCs.”​ ​The legal​ ​loophole​ ​in​ ​a​ ​nutshell:​ ​the​ ​EPA​ ​has​ ​authority​ ​to​ ​regulate​ ​ozone-depleting​ ​gases,​ ​but not​ ​other​ ​harmful​ ​substances.​ ​HFCs​ ​were​ ​the​ ​alternative​ ​to​ ​the​ ​older​ ​chemicals​ ​that​ ​were harmful​ ​to​ ​the​ ​ozone​ ​layer.​ ​And​ ​though​ ​HFCs​ ​don’t​ ​deplete​ ​the​ ​ozone,​ ​they​ ​are​ ​still considered​ ​greenhouse​ ​gases​ ​that​ ​are​ ​incredibly​ ​impactful​ ​on​ ​climate​ ​change.​​ ​“Congress has​ ​not​ ​yet​ ​enacted​ ​general​ ​climate​ ​change​ ​legislation,”​ ​Judge​ ​Brett​ ​Kavanaugh​ ​wrote.​ ​In response,​ ​“Judge​ ​Robert​ ​Wilkins,​ ​an​ ​Obama​ ​appointee,​ ​dissented,​ ​saying​ ​that​ ​the​ ​EPA was​ ​due​ ​deference​ ​for​ ​what​ ​he​ ​said​ ​was​ ​a​ ​reasonable​ ​interpretation​ ​of​ ​the​ ​statute.”​ ​

Chemical and Engineering News states that “the EPA rule would have banned the use of HFC-134a as an air conditioner refrigerant in most cars and trucks sold in the U.S. starting with model-year 2021.” All avenues​ ​for​ ​appeals​ ​to​ ​this​ ​ruling​ ​are​ ​being​ ​explored.

The​ ​original​ ​Obama-era​ ​ruling​ ​was​ ​an​ ​important​ ​piece​ ​of​ ​the​ ​puzzle​ ​to​ ​meeting the​ ​Paris​ ​Climate​ ​Accord​ ​goals,​ ​and​ ​would​ ​have​ ​significantly​ ​cut​ ​our​ ​carbon​ ​emissions. This​ ​commitment​ ​to​ ​phasing​ ​out​ ​HFCs​ ​was​ ​furthered​ ​by​ ​meetings​ ​in​ ​Kigali​ ​in​ ​2016, when​ ​the​ ​Montreal​ ​Protocol​ ​was​ ​updated.​ ​The​ ​Montreal​ ​Protocol​ ​was​ ​a​ ​treaty​ ​signed​ ​in 1987​ ​that​ ​successfully​ ​phased​ ​out​ ​an​ ​older​ ​generation​ ​of​ ​refrigerant​ ​gases​ ​that​ ​are harmful​ ​to​ ​the​ ​ozone​ ​layer.

As​ ​the Inside Climate News ​article​ ​states,​ ​“the​ ​Trump​ ​administration​ ​has​ ​given​ ​no​ ​indication​ ​of whether​ ​it​ ​intends​ ​to​ ​bring​ ​the​ ​Kigali​ ​amendment​ ​before​ ​the​ ​Senate​ ​for​ ​ratification.”​ ​But there​ ​was,​ ​and​ ​still​ ​could​ ​be,​ ​hope​ ​to​ ​maintain​ ​the​ ​Obama-era​ ​rulings​ ​during​ ​the​ ​Trump administration.​ ​Chemical​ ​manufacturers​ ​that​ ​have​ ​worked​ ​with​ ​Trump​ ​are​ ​investing​ ​in more​ ​climate-friendly​ ​alternatives​ ​to​ ​HFCs.​ ​Climate​ ​change​ ​ingenuity​ ​and​ ​the​ ​bottom​ ​line are​ ​by​ ​no​ ​means​ ​mutually​ ​exclusive.​ ​The​ ​way​ ​we​ ​cool​ ​ourselves​ ​could​ ​be​ ​a​ ​bipartisan issue.​ ​American​ ​companies​ ​have​ ​the​ ​potential​ ​to​ ​act​ ​as​ ​leaders​ ​in coolant technology.​

Want Energy Solutions: Fix Air Con

July 2017

The irony that air conditioning contributes to global warming is hard to miss: as temperatures increase, the more we use air conditioning—and the more we use air conditioning, the more we heat the planet. And yet this piece of the puzzle is largely missing from the climate change dialogue. According to this New York Times article by Lisa Friedman, one reason is that coolant chemicals (refrigerants) don’t make for a very sexy dinner party conversation.

In 1987, the Montreal Protocol, an international treaty designed to protect the ozone layer by phasing out the production of numerous substances, namely CFCs, that are responsible for ozone depletion, was signed. Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) became the alternative. While HFCs are less directly harmful to the ozone layer, they are still greenhouse gases and, according to the EPA, are designated as having “high global warming potential (GWP).”

An amendment to the Montreal Protocol was reached in Kigali last year, geared to eliminate the use of HFCs. Another NYT article, reporting on the deal, states that HFCs “function as a sort of supercharged greenhouse gas, with 1,000 times the heat-trapping potency of carbon dioxide.” Phasing out HFC’s could mean “avoiding an estimated half degree Celsius of warming by 2100.” The richest countries, including the US, are supposed to freeze HFC consumption by 2018. But the United States’ relationship to this amendment is unclear at this point.

Reimagining cooling is essential to approaching the problem of climate change and one of the major factors that could lead to emission reduction. If we change how we cool ourselves, we could significantly lower our potential warming from the predicted 4 to 5 degree increase.

The Montreal Protocol caused such a shift in the production and science around cooling, motivated by our clear impact on the environment, that it gives this writer hope another agreement like it can be reached. The new amendment is one step of many, but it is a big step.

Factories that manufacture air conditioners are also a large contributor to carbon emissions. Friedman’s article goes on to discuss the efficiency of air conditioning production: demand for air conditioning is increasing, which means the energy needed for production will increase as well. “1.6 billion new air-conditioners by 2050 means thousands of new power plants will have to come on line to support them.”

The demand for air conditioning is growing rapidly. Without innovation, this will only contribute further to global warming, and hence to an even greater demand for cooling technologies—an endless loop. That’s why these issues of cooling chemicals and efficiency are starting to be approached in creative, interdisciplinary, and comprehensive ways, across the interconnected fields of science and design. Innovation and policy changes go hand-in-hand when it comes to air products, which, to me, is a pretty sexy dinner party topic.

Air Pollution Brings Down The Stock Market

April 2017

“Every time air quality decreased by one standard deviation, we saw a 12% reduction in stock returns.”

Comparing daily data from the S&P 500 index with daily air-quality data from an EPA sensor close to Wall Street, Professor Anthony Heyes and his colleagues from the University of Ottawa found a connection between higher pollution and lower stock performance concluding that air pollution brings down the stock market.

Apparently being exposed to bad air can make you feel depressed which in turn can reduce your cognitive capability. Bad moods and lower cognitive capabilities tend to reduce the appetite for risk, associated with lower returns.

For the complete article, click here

Interview by Scott Berinato